About your Search

20130117
20130125
STATION
CSPAN 5
CNNW 4
MSNBCW 4
CNN 2
CSPAN2 2
MSNBC 2
LANGUAGE
English 20
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)
they're worried about their elections. i think that in the center of the country and the red states where these senators are running, they don't think that the president's message works, and they're going to try to move themselves away from that because they're worried about it. they're worried about all these -- >> we're talking about the majority of the country though. if the majority is with the president, is he too liberal? that's what i'm asking. can you call the guy too left when he's right where the middle is? how can you keep saying that? it's the only question i want to put to you. if more than 50% support equality of marriage, more than 50% support a woman's right to choose, if more than 50% are with him on guns and foreign policy, how can you call that the far left? >> let me put it this way, the fact of the matter is this is going to be politically very problematic for harry reid because for the constituency he represents in the senate, they're not going to be able to get a lot of things that the president wants done because it's too far to the left of him. for example,
fulfilled its responsibility in that regard in the last two years and went through the fire in the election. i think that's fair. the senate just simply has not. and it is discouraging. you know, it just takes 51 votes. that's all it takes over there. i actually heard commentators tell us, oh, no, it takes 60. it takes no such thing. it just takes 51 votes where the majority now has 55 and at one point had 59 and was unable to -- unwilling, i should say, get 51 where you got over 228 of our members do last year which was actually vote on a budget going into an election year. mr. chairman, i'm delighted to see legs like this. i do think there are legitimate constitutional questions. i think those we'll have a vigorous discussion about that in the next couple of days. i'm comforted by some of a campaign. the precedence you cite, mr. chairman. at the end of the day, this is about getting us to do our jobs. there isn't a member up here that wouldn't tell you it really is our obligation to write a budget. again, our friends in the majority did not. i'm really happy to see the minority, they have
is supposed to be for the people. it is not. we really don't elect the president no more. the electoral votes do. we don't have any say. we are the ones that just keep paying. we are paying more and more and more taxes all the time. so there's always some reason they've got to have more money. why don't they take some money out of their pockets for one year? let them learn to live like we do. they all live way above their means. does not take a half million dollars or zero million dollars a year to live.- -- it does not take a half million dollars or $1 million a year to live. host: we have members of congress coming in this morning and we will throw out your proposal to them to see what they think. on twitter -- here's a headline in the washington post. let's hear or twice house secretary jay carney hata said. [video clip] >> the bill still has to overcome concerns expressed by members of the house and senate before it can pass both chambers and reached the president's desk. if it does and it reaches his desk, he will not stand in the way of the bill becoming law. broadly speaking, i will po
out who are still elected representatives of the party. one, to say hey, let's have a real conversation here and not just hide behind the nra and its rhetoric of fear. >> michael, do you think there are any republicans that will vote for any of the proposals that were put on the table today? >> i do. and i'll tell you why. it's the numbers that you show in the first segment today, those poll numbers. that's where the rubber meets the road here. it's a turning point and one that the party better get in front of. >> at this point in time, the only gop voice we are really hearing are the crazy ones. so you might be right, michael, susan, any other republicans who are out there. but as the debate is being framed, we don't see any real republicans in leadership positions taking a moderate -- >> michael, i hope you're correct. >> the obama campaign apparatus is going to take on the nra. we'll ask if the president will hit the road to make his case directly to the american people. then find out how survivors are reacting to the president's plan. sandy hook's top educator gives an
her outburst is not an outburst. it's a re-election flection of l think about this. if you were going to be real about these issues you would be asking what can we do to beef up the security. something gop members have already cut, you know, and they have decisions to cut it now in these days as we're speaking. it's rank hypocrisy. i think it's a fresh breath of air that people -- >> i agree with you about the hypocrisy because i remember 9/11 very clearly and i remember how this country rallied around a president who had limited ability but we all rallied around him. the first reaction was he says we're going to get the people who knocked down this building and everybody cheered him. they weren't saying how did you screw it up buddy. it was about unit. the left and center are much better at national unity than the right. the right sees a national tragedy like this far off in bengha benghazi, not in new york city, at a very exposed position which could have happened no matter how many troops he would there. we don't blame it on everybody even know it was new york right into the heart
it because he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected. >> well, he wasn't concealing anything. he's a progressive democrat. i loved the speech yesterday because of what he didn't say. he very often goes into this kind of airy dreaming of how we'll just transcend partisanship. well, we won't. politics is partisan. washington is partisan. it was for president clinton who wanted to campaign that he was there, campaigned saying i want to be a uniter, not a divider. our president said, he offered a vision that republicans should sign on to. they used to be tough when i was a kid. now they are just whiny. he reached out to them plenty in his first term and all they did was spit in his eye. >> i think when it comes to comprehensive immigration reform, i think the president can work with senator marco rubio. but what about on climate change? what about same-sex marriage? is there going to be cooperation in those two areas? >> number one, on same-sex marriage, the president hasn't thrown any weight behind legislation or for repealing the legislation that paul's because, bill's boss signed
fundamental responsibility of any elected official is to pass a budget. now when we took over in the house in four months, we passed the budget, many of you have said, was one of the toughest ones to come out of the house. higher vote than at any other time in the last decade. democrats said we are going to do political damage to you in the election. you know what? we were honest with the american public. where we currently stood and our budget wasn't about just today but tomorrow, but about securing medicare and building for a better future for your children. what's the history in the senate? last time they passed the budget, the ipad hadn't been introduced. we have had trillion dollar deficits every year. nobody would expect to be paid if they didn't do their job. no budget, no pay. if harry reid cannot pass a budget, they are fundamentally moving the responsibility why they should even be in the majority. to me, this is a turning point for this country, getting to the fundamentals of a planning for the future that this could be the mark of a great american comeback. >> good evening. yes
ourselves to face the problems head-on. i understand that the passions of an election can sometimes overshadow the governor. the presidential campaign is now behind us. it is my hope that the president will finally be willing to do what republicans have been asking him to do since his first inauguration, four years ago. that is to work with us on identifying durable solutions to the problems that we can was altogether set aside those things we can't agree on and focus on what we can agree on. we should start with spending and debt. if we don't get a handle on that him and nothing else matters. we don't work together to strengthen our entitlement programs, they will go bankrupt. it will render worthless the promise that we have built. the president said yesterday that these programs free us to take the risk that make our country great. it would also strengthen and protect us now. in a few years they simply won't be there in their current form. if we don't work together to control the debt, the cost of our interest payments alone will eventually crowd out funding for things we all agr
republicans elected in 1994 and then became a clinton conspiracyialyial theorist. so i think the voters of his district know how to treat that behavior, by senning him home. >> stephanie: a new poll finds that president obama's approval rating 55% approve 43% disapprove. so i -- doesn't that make you crazy, karl when these republicans go on and say the american people -- >> well they mean, you know the people in the try corner hats. the various koch brothers. >> stephanie: yeah, all of the koch brothers. >> yeah. by the way they would be in a much better place as a party, and we would be in a much better place as a country if they knew what the american people wanted. they will win elections from time to time in the near future but unless they change their stances on issues, unless they come around to issues that are popular with young people and single people and women and gay people and people of color -- >> stephanie: most carbon-based life forms. >> yeah unless they come around on those issues in 15 years there won't be a republican party like it looks today
people elected it to do. mr. president, may i ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be now extended until 6:30 p.m. today and all provisions of the previous order remain in effect. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. chambliss: i rise to speak today about our tax code as well as our economic future. there's a problem with our tax code, one that hits home with nearly all americans, and that is its complexity. in the fast past few years i have met with hundreds and hundreds of constituents who are worried about this issue, individuals, small businesses, farms and large corporations alike struggle with meeting their obligations to the i.r.s. because of the complexity of our current tax code. earlier this month the i.r.s. taxpayer advocate revealed some startling figures in the agency's annual record report to congress. it estimates that individuals and businesses spend 6.1 billion hours each year complying with the i.r.s. tax filing requirements. the c
is working and in fact, it wasn't working. it helped get this president re-elected by misleading the american public, but now, the chickens are coming home to roost and we're going to continue to pursue this until we find the truth. >> i want to ask you one other question based on what your republican colleague rand paul said today. it was a pretty strong statement. here he is. >> had i been president at the time and i found that you did not read the cables from benghazi, you did not read the cables from ambassador stevens, i would have relieved you of you post. i think it's inexcusable. >> do you agree? >> i'd say the issue is moot because hillary clinton is moving on and senator kerry's stepping up to the plate probably, so that's rand paul's opinion. >> do you think she'd make a good president? i have to ask that because 67% of this country view her favorably. her unfavorable is 28%. the president, anybody in this country, would die for that. >> listen, the people on the other side of the aisle aren't taking the fact this nation's going bankrupt seriously, so she's a member of that party,
for re-election in 2014. >> do you vote based upon one issue or do you look at a variety of issues? same thing about the issue of choice. there are some people out there who say i am only going to vote based upon whether or not you are pro-choice or pro-life. those are single voter issues. when you look at polling data, you don't have a significant number of single issue voters in america. they are saying, hey, i might be for same-sex marriage or against it or pro-life or pro-choice, if it's about finances, i might choose a different decision. >> i want to thank roland for making my point for me. president obama is engaging in what we like to call hubris. george w. bush and karl rove thought they had a permanent majority. it wasn't that permanent. ronald reagan's majority didn't last forever either. the simple truth is the more successful you are when you win a big victory, it also means democrats are representing silicon valley billionaires and struggling immigrants in the inner city. you represent both of those groups, there are tensions in your coalition and that coalition you win one
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)